KOKKAT LONAPPAN VARGHESE,PORT BLAIR vs. ITO, WARD - 3(4), PORT BLAIR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1953/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 January 2019AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the matter required fresh consideration by the Assessing Officer. The assessee was to be given an adequate opportunity of being heard, especially considering they live in a remote area.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was decided ex parte by the CIT(A) as the assessee failed to appear. The Assessing Officer also passed an ex parte order under Section 144. The assessee contended that adequate opportunity was not provided.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte orders passed by the lower authorities were justified and if the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy

Appearances by: Shri P. K. Sikdar, AR, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : January 8, 2019 Date of pronouncing the order : January 16, 2019

ORDER Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :-

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT(A)’), dated 28.06.2018 passed u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2014-15.

2.

After hearing rival contentions, considering the papers and records of the order of authorities below, I find that the ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex parte order as the assessee failed to appear before him. The appeal was not disposed off on merits. I also find that the Assessing Officer also passed an ex parte order u/s 144 of the Act. The assessee before us pleaded that adequate opportunity was not given to him by the Revenue authorities.

3.

In my view, the issue requires fresh consideration by the Assessing Officer after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. I note that the Kokkat Lonappan Varghese Assessment Year: 2014-15 assessee lives in a remote area. Under the circumstances, I set aside the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law on the ground of natural justice. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →